EPTDo you really believe in times of the NSA collecting anything and everything that they would not try to get the specs of the ECAT, if it was legit?
Rossi's energy catalyzer - Page 44
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Restrider
Germany129 Posts
Do you really believe in times of the NSA collecting anything and everything that they would not try to get the specs of the ECAT, if it was legit? | ||
|
Superouman
France2195 Posts
On January 28 2014 04:31 xDaunt wrote: Don't get me wrong. I'm still waiting to see the thing work. However, I do think that the general poo-pooing of the machine that is going on in this thread is a little premature. Premature? This has been going on for nearly three years now, how long do you expect people to wait for real results? | ||
|
radscorpion9
Canada2252 Posts
On January 28 2014 07:40 Gorsameth wrote: This stuff is 2.5 years old. If it is true then he solved the world energy crisis and could be one of the wealthiest man on the planet because of it yet the project is no further then it was 2.5 years ago. How is saying it is a scam premature? I would always be skeptical of making such certain claims. There is a chance, albeit a small one, that Rossi is simply being extremely careful or paranoid about ensuring that no one else claims his discovery. Maybe you fully understand how the patenting process works and all of the things one might want to be aware of when you discover a great new technology, as well as all of the potential pitfalls, but I am skeptical that anyone here is such an expert, and I believe there could be a lot of hidden variables at work that may not be immediately obvious to a casual observer. There is always a chance, some reason you hadn't thought of, some bizarre conflict of personalities or legal problems that may have delayed it for so long. Some court cases take decades to sort out; there could be various administrative problems as well. We simply don't know for sure; we are not involved with the project, we are not intimately connected with the process. At the very least, I think you should say its probably a scam. But it feels so wrong to simply assume that its a scam with 100% certainty, because I really don't think we have the knowledge to justify that claim. edit: There's also the conspiracy theory angle, that hidden powers are trying to suppress the knowledge. I know, its a frustrating possibility to consider and its easier to just call it a scam. But I really think we should be open to these possibilities. By all means attribute a high probability though; the chances that it is a conspiracy are probably low as well considering the necessary complexity of such a system. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21954 Posts
On January 28 2014 08:24 radscorpion9 wrote: I would always be skeptical of making such certain claims. There is a chance, albeit a small one, that Rossi is simply being extremely careful or paranoid about ensuring that no one else claims his discovery. Maybe you fully understand how the patenting process works and all of the things one might want to be aware of when you discover a great new technology, as well as all of the potential pitfalls, but I am skeptical that anyone here is such an expert, and I believe there could be a lot of hidden variables at work that may not be immediately obvious to a casual observer. There is always a chance, some reason you hadn't thought of, some bizarre conflict of personalities or legal problems that may have delayed it for so long. Some court cases take decades to sort out; there could be various administrative problems as well. We simply don't know for sure; we are not involved with the project, we are not intimately connected with the process. At the very least, I think you should say its probably a scam. But it feels so wrong to simply assume that its a scam with 100% certainty, because I really don't think we have the knowledge to justify that claim. edit: There's also the conspiracy theory angle, that hidden powers are trying to suppress the knowledge. I know, its a frustrating possibility to consider and its easier to just call it a scam. But I really think we should be open to these possibilities. By all means attribute a high probability though; the chances that it is a conspiracy are probably low as well considering the necessary complexity of such a system. He has found magic substance X that makes his machine work. But instead of just restricting access to X he forces a double black box. Your not allowed to measure output of the device. your only allowed to measure the output of a control box that 'might' be connected to the device. yes im willing to 100% say this is a scam. | ||
|
Chocolate
United States2350 Posts
There's also the conspiracy theory angle, that hidden powers are trying to suppress the knowledge. I know, its a frustrating possibility to consider and its easier to just call it a scam. But I really think we should be open to these possibilities. By all means attribute a high probability though; the chances that it is a conspiracy are probably low as well considering the necessary complexity of such a system. Then why not just say how it's done so that I can build a catalyzer in my back yard? At the very least, I think you should say its probably a scam. But it feels so wrong to simply assume that its a scam with 100% certainty, because I really don't think we have the knowledge to justify that claim. It's hard to say a lot of things with 100% certainty. I'm pretty sure the man just wants to drag out public interest and investment (though apparently he sold?) as long as possible. There would be no reason to sit on technology like this for so long and not attempt to scale it up or even adequately explain it. | ||
|
Umpteen
United Kingdom1570 Posts
On January 28 2014 08:24 radscorpion9 wrote: I would always be skeptical of making such certain claims. There is a chance, albeit a small one, that Rossi is simply being extremely careful or paranoid about ensuring that no one else claims his discovery. There is a chance, albeit a small one, that I could walk through a wall without damaging myself or the wall. 1. He keeps saying e-cats are available for sale. This is a lie; they're not. 2. He keeps saying e-cats are safety-certified, or that they are undergoing certification. This is a lie; they're not. 3. He says all these things to promote the sale of licenses to sell e-cats, the only borderline-legal way to make money off vapourware. 4. He is a convicted criminal and fraudster with a history of free energy scams. You want me to withhold judgement? You want me to attach a meaningful non-zero probability to the idea that a convicted con-artist just happened to stumble across a revolutionary source of power, and purely coincidentally is playing this discovery out like a scam too? | ||
|
ElMeanYo
United States1032 Posts
We also have the chance, right now, to beat other countries in the race for the next wave of high-tech manufacturing jobs. My administration has launched two hubs for high-tech manufacturing in Raleigh and Youngstown, where we’ve connected businesses to research universities that can help America lead the world in advanced technologies. Tonight, I’m announcing we’ll launch six more this year. Bipartisan bills in both houses could double the number of these hubs and the jobs they create. So get those bills to my desk and put more Americans back to work. Obama was referring to the 'Research Triangle'... a complex of high-tech research facilities located in Raleigh, NC. Here is an article about Obama's recent visit there, where they showed him progress in wideband gap semiconductors: http://www.heraldsun.com/news/x318369419/Obama-taps-Triangle-for-tech-innovation One of the companies in this complex is RTI International, one of the worlds largest and most high-tech research institutes. Guess who is on the board of directors for RTI? Yes, a certain Mr. Thomas F. Darden, President and Chief Executive Officer, Cherokee Investment Partners: http://www.rti.org/page.cfm/Corporate_Governance As you may recall from my previous update, Mr Darden is the founder of Industrial Heat, LLC, the company that has bought the rights to Rossi's eCat. Incidently, Industrial Heat is also Located in Raleigh. | ||
|
Abraxas514
Canada475 Posts
| ||
|
ZackAttack
United States884 Posts
Edit: Where is the Amazing Randi? | ||
|
Traeon
Austria366 Posts
The possibility of Rossi being deluded or incapable of properly measuring energy/power was eliminated with the Levi et. al. paper. The possibility of Rossi having deceived Industrial Heat has been eliminated if one joins all the dots. Rossi has been talking about his business partner for a long time. In July of 2013 Rossi claimed that his business partner had replicated the e-cat technology: for the first time, an E-Cat module, entirely produced by our USA Partner in the new factory ( a magnificence), charged with the charge made by the Partner’s CEO, using the materials we teached to buy, prepare,manipulate, treat, to make the charges, assembled , insulated, has started its operation, and the results are the same of the E-Cats built by us. This event means that for the first time an E-Cat not built by me, not controlled by me and not charged by me, not tested in my factory, but manufactured from third parties upon our instructions and know how has worked properly. This is the first unit of the plant that will give to the factory of our USA Partner all its necessary thermal energy, and is also the school ship for the employees. It is very important that it has been completely made by the Customer, not by me Source Industrial Heat has not denied this, and they've had plenty of time to do so. The press release also says In addition, performance validation tests were conducted in the presence of IH personnel and certified by an independent expert. By the way, the claim that Rossi sold the e-cat tech for $11 million is false. Vaughn did not disclose financial terms of the deal with Rossi, but Industrial Heat stated in a U.S. securities filing last fall that it had already raised $11.6 million from investors. Source Finally, the possibility of Industrial Heat knowingly participating in a scam is so laughable it need not be considered. Industrial Heat is an affiliate company of Cherokee Investment Partners, a company that manages $2 billion. | ||
|
The Savage
6 Posts
People are suckers for Hope and Change. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21954 Posts
On February 02 2014 00:43 Traeon wrote: After the news of Industrial Heat acquiring the e-cat tech, I'm 100% sure that the tech is real. When you have eliminated all other possibilities, whatever remains must be the truth. The possibility of Rossi being deluded or incapable of properly measuring energy/power was eliminated with the Levi et. al. paper. The possibility of Rossi having deceived Industrial Heat has been eliminated if one joins all the dots. Rossi has been talking about his business partner for a long time. In July of 2013 Rossi claimed that his business partner had replicated the e-cat technology: Source Industrial Heat has not denied this, and they've had plenty of time to do so. The press release also says By the way, the claim that Rossi sold the e-cat tech for $11 million is false. Source Finally, the possibility of Industrial Heat knowingly participating in a scam is so laughable it need not be considered. Industrial Heat is an affiliate company of Cherokee Investment Partners, a company that manages $2 billion. So once again explain to me why all measurements have only been allowed on a double black box. Not even the in/output of the e-cat is allowed to be measured. They could only measure the output of a further control device attached to the e-cat. If it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck. It might just be a duck. | ||
|
Traeon
Austria366 Posts
On February 02 2014 01:20 Gorsameth wrote: So once again explain to me why all measurements have only been allowed on a double black box. I'm not sure what you mean by double black box testing, so I'll assume that you're talking about black box testing and the Levi et. al. paper because that's the best evidence that we have at the moment. First, black box testing is a normal industry procedure. Black box testing means that no assumptions are made about uninspected parts of a machine. In the Levi et. al. paper, they measured the total input and output energy. Then they measured the volume and weight of the apparatus, including the uninspected parts. With that, they were able to calculate the volumetric and gravimetric energy densities of the entire thing and they were far greater than any known chemical source. There was no radioactivity either. Measurement errors of such size can be excluded. The conclusion is that anomalous energy generation takes place in the e-cat. Computed volumetric and gravimetric energy densities were found to be far above those of any known chemical source. Even by the most conservative assumptions as to the errors in the measurements, the result is still one order of magnitude greater than conventional energy sources. http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.3913 | ||
|
Rannasha
Netherlands2398 Posts
On February 02 2014 02:04 Traeon wrote: I'm not sure what you mean by double black box testing, so I'll assume that you're talking about black box testing and the Levi et. al. paper because that's the best evidence that we have at the moment. It is a description of the "experimental setup" of the measurements of the Rossi device. It's one black box (the e-cat) connected to another black box (the control box). Noone knows what's in the boxes and measurements may only be done on the side of the control box. First, black box testing is a normal industry procedure. Black box testing means that no assumptions are made about uninspected parts of a machine. Sure you can black-box-test the thing. X amount of energy goes in, Y amount of energy goes out. There. No assumptions made about uninspected parts. However, for it to be a meaningful device, these uninspected parts can't remain uninspected. There are serious claims surrounding the machine, but with the amount of testing allowed, these can't be verified. In the Levi et. al. paper, they measured the total input and output energy. Then they measured the volume and weight of the apparatus, including the uninspected parts. With that, they were able to calculate the volumetric and gravimetric energy densities of the entire thing and they were far greater than any known chemical source. There was no radioactivity either. Measurement errors of such size can be excluded. The conclusion is that anomalous energy generation takes place in the e-cat. They measure the volume and weight of an identical apparatus, not the version that was operational during the test runs. We have to rely on the honesty of a convicted con-man that the identical apparatus is indeed identical. The claim of no radioactivity can't be substantiated. Sure, there may not have been any radioactivity outside the box, but it is trivial to create a casing that is shielded against most forms radioactivity. If a radioactive source inside the box is responsible for the heat generation, the box can be designed to hide the evidence. | ||
|
Ropid
Germany3557 Posts
| ||
|
Traeon
Austria366 Posts
On February 02 2014 04:58 Rannasha wrote: They measure the volume and weight of an identical apparatus, not the version that was operational during the test runs. This is false. Read page 22 of the report. On February 02 2014 04:58 Rannasha wrote:The claim of no radioactivity can't be substantiated. This is also false. Radiation measurements were performed by an independent expert. Read page 6 of the report. Sure, there may not have been any radioactivity outside the box, but it is trivial to create a casing that is shielded against most forms radioactivity. If a radioactive source inside the box is responsible for the heat generation, the box can be designed to hide the evidence. Neutrons from any fusion would go right through. A hidden radioisotope fuel (like plutonium-238) is so unrealistic it need not be considered. The paper does not make any claims about the reaction or cause of the anomalous heat by the way, since it's a black box test. It only attempts to answer the question whether the heat can be explained by conventional sources or not. | ||
|
Umpteen
United Kingdom1570 Posts
On February 02 2014 00:43 Traeon wrote: After the news of Industrial Heat acquiring the e-cat tech, I'm 100% sure that the tech is real. When you have eliminated all other possibilities, whatever remains must be the truth. The possibility of Rossi being deluded or incapable of properly measuring energy/power was eliminated with the Levi et. al. paper. Bullshit. Utter, utter bullshit. The Levi et al paper is devoid of merit. It is akin to claiming you know how many people are in a house because you counted how many entered through the front door. There is a known back door (DC current). There is, as others have mentioned, a known side door (the earth cable which Rossi won't let anyone attach a meter to) Not only does the paper present as fact things that are merely claimed by Rossi (such as the contents of the device), but it makes a number of unsupportable deductions. My favourite is the claim that the darker stripes in the first device are the 'shadows' of the heating elements, on the grounds that they are spaced correctly to BE the shadows. Except for bloody obvious reasons the bright stripes are also spaced correctly to be the heating elements. It's absolutely asinine. FFS the guy LIED about being able to turn waste into fuel oil.He did time for it while the government spent millions cleaning up his crap. He LIED to the US government about being able to generate electricity from heat. He LIED, either to the regulatory body responsible for licensing radioactive devices, or to everyone else, about what his new bottle of snake oil actually does. Please, PLEASE stop perpetuating the bullshit. | ||
|
Traeon
Austria366 Posts
On February 02 2014 09:36 Umpteen wrote: Bullshit. Utter, utter bullshit. The Levi et al paper is devoid of merit. It is akin to claiming you know how many people are in a house because you counted how many entered through the front door. There is a known back door (DC current). There is, as others have mentioned, a known side door (the earth cable which Rossi won't let anyone attach a meter to) Read the paper. All wires were accounted for. On February 02 2014 09:36 Umpteen wrote:Not only does the paper present as fact things that are merely claimed by Rossi (such as the contents of the device), but it makes a number of unsupportable deductions. My favourite is the claim that the darker stripes in the first device are the 'shadows' of the heating elements, on the grounds that they are spaced correctly to BE the shadows. Except for bloody obvious reasons the bright stripes are also spaced correctly to be the heating elements. It's absolutely asinine. None of these things matter when the device produces anomalous heat. I also disagree with your statement that the bright stripes could be the heating elements because the power supplied to the e-cat wasn't enough to make the whole thing glow orange, let alone destroy it. ![[image loading]](http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/files/2013/05/fusion1-600x354.jpg) | ||
|
Umpteen
United Kingdom1570 Posts
| ||
|
Traeon
Austria366 Posts
On February 02 2014 22:36 Umpteen wrote: No, YOU read the paper. The method used for measuring ac power was incapable of detecting a parallel DC supply. The researchers were not electrical engineers and did not have the necessary experience to set up an airtight test. There IS no anomalous heat unless you know for sure the amount of energy supplied to the device itself. I did read the paper. It says DC was excluded (page 30). The idea that DC was unaccounted is false and stems from an interview and the belief that measurements relied only one particular instrument. Hanno Essén commented on this and confirmed that DC was definitely excluded: In the interview I answered that there was no direct measurement of dc (since the clamps could not detect such). This was a bit hasty. In future I will not answer such technical questions without conferring with all coauthors. After analysing what we checked and measured (which were many more variables that those from the clamps) we can definitely exclude dc-current. (This is what comes from being nice to journalists.) http://www.e-catworld.com/2013/05/essen-corrects-we-can-definitely-exclude-dc-current/ Lars Tegnér was the team's electrical engineer, or at least that's how it sounds like as he works in the Department of Engineering Sciences, Division of Electricity, Uppsala University. You sceptics frequently make the mistake of not paying close attention to what you're criticizing (probably because you're already convinced that it cannot be real and therefore doesn't deserve proper scrutiny). | ||
| ||
